- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
I vote for Ajit Pai to go to jail
He can bunk with that asshole who screwed up the post office.
Last I checked he was still in charge of it. The people Biden selected for the board of governors apparently decided he was an ok guy.
He’s qualified. He’s just an asshole.
One might say, if they were a discerning individual, that that would be a disqualifying quality in a candidate.
I vote for him to work in a carnival dunk tank for the rest of his professional life. That guy is a clown.
deleted by creator
This is two back to back huge wins for Biden, and honestly for all people who understand that corporate regulation is the only way we’re crawling out of our boring dystopia. Killing non-competes AND restoring net neutrality in the same week is massive for Americans.
Sadly, the average person has no idea what this is or what it means
These are excellent steps. Is this the Biden admin trying to build some positive reception among people who are upset about his support of Israel?
I don’t think this has anything to do with Israel. The government moves so slow, this was probably all started back in 2021 or 2022 at the start of his term.
Everyone bitching about Biden, yet he’s actually doing something besides slinging insults and eating adderall. I really hope he curb stomps the cheeto come election time.
I don’t, I just hope cheeto man loses. I’m not a fan of Biden, but I’m less a fan of Trump.
I’d love for some third party to suck up enough of the vote that we have a 3-way race, with Trump coming up short.
I don’t have a problem with Biden, I feel he’s done an adequate job considering what he has to deal with. I would love to see a three way race but all that would do is take blue votes away because red is voting red regardless of who is on the ballot. So a third party is just a W for the red.
Eh, he was near the bottom of my list of preferences for 2020, and his running mate was my absolute lowest. I’m no Democrat, and I would’ve voted third party if the opponent were pretty much anyone else, but I did end up voting for him because Trump was so bad.
I’d love to see a big third party that pulls more from the right, just to stick it to Trump.
It’s great that the FCC can get back to doing it’s job properly now that its chair isn’t an industry plant
How about regulating those fucking prices? I now pay the same price for 300Mbps that I used to pay for 1gbps
Nah, go the other way: deregulate competition.
Prices stay high because ISPs are able to block competition with stupid compliance laws (e.g. obstacles to run cable, obstacles to register, and lawsuits galore). In my area, prices are pretty reasonable, because we actually have decent competition. We have:
- DSL
- Cable
- local ISP - based on failed old muni fiber rollout (stupid state laws)
- radios - works well for some people
- 5G-based services
- upcoming muni fiber project
The muni fiber project is doing a lot of work here, but our local ISP is pretty decent as well, with speeds from 20/10 to 1000/500, from $40 to $125, taxes included in price (5 tiers total; only had two crappy tiers before muni fiber project announced). Cable prices are also reasonable because they need to compete with the local muni ISP, but they hide fees and whatnot, so I don’t bother with them.
As someone thats lived through numerous industry deregulations, it never works out in favor of the consumer.
That’s a pretty broad brush you got there.
Basically what happened was, cable companies made a deal with cities to essentially get a monopoly on Internet infrastructure, and they keep lobbying for additional barriers to block entry for new competitors. So if a new telecom tries to come in, they’ll lock them up in lawsuits to encourage them to go away. Here’s an example in Nashville. Generally they’ll lobby for newcomers to have to ask them for help or permission, then drag their feet to waste the other company’s time and money.
So eliminating those types of regulations could help new ISPs compete in new markets. There should obviously be some regulations, but they need to be reasonable and relevant, like they need to fix any roads they dig up, get permission from the city to run cable on existing conduit, etc.
But who will think of the shareholders!!!
So if ISPs are once again Title II common carriers, how can they enforce the TikTok ban? 🤔
It will be enforced through the app stores, I imagine. You raise a good point, though, that people will still be able to access TikTok through mobile web.
Could be the beginning of a nationwide firewall type system like they have in China. I feel like most current methods of blocking an app could be pretty easily circumvented.
Beyond the government sniffing every packet and blocking TikTok-related ones, I’m not sure how else they could effectively block the app.
And that’s a very bad path to start down.
I don’t doubt that TikTok would eventually post an apk on its website after being banned from app stores, so app should be a non-issue too.
But in the U.S., most people use iPhones :(
deleted by creator
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The US government on Thursday banned internet service providers (ISPs) from meddling in the speeds their customers receive when browsing the web and downloading files, restoring tough rules rescinded during the Trump administration and setting the stage for a major legal battle with the broadband industry.
The net neutrality regulations adopted Thursday by the Federal Communications Commission prohibit providers such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from selectively speeding up, slowing down or blocking users’ internet traffic.
The latest rules show how, with a 3-2 Democratic majority, the FCC is moving to reassert its authority over an industry that powers the modern digital economy, touching everything from education to health care and enabling advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence.
The vote marks the latest twist in a years-long battle between regulators on the one hand, who say consumer protections are needed to ensure all websites are treated equally, and ISPs on the other who describe the rules as heavy-handed government intervention.
Whether it is throttling content, junk or hidden fees, arbitrary pricing, deceptive advertising or unreliable service, broadband providers have proven over the years that without proper oversight, they will not hesitate to use their power to increase profits at the expense of consumers.”
In past legal battles over net neutrality, courts have deferred to the FCC, ruling that it has wide latitude to regulate ISPs as it sees fit using the authority it derives from the agency’s congressional charter, the Communications Act of 1934.
The original article contains 861 words, the summary contains 242 words. Saved 72%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
You know, the FCC is supposed to be experts on these kinds of things. And the fact that they can just flip-flop back and forth based on political whims makes me not trust their expertise at all. It makes them look really bad.
They’re a regulatory body. If a Republican president really wanted to ban pasteurizing milk they could make the FDA do it
Killing net neutrality was a political whim that went against expert opinion, undoing it isn’t. Much in the same way that a liberal court would almost certainly reinstate roe
